Digital cameras include an infinite quantity of "film", so it will be cheaper in the long rise.
The fact that a 20 year old camera still has resale value is another separate issue. A 486 may have less resale value than a mechanical olivetti typewriter, but does it make the olivetti any more usefull? Nope, it only means we can produce faster chips and computer at a very low cost so it the 486 doesn't matter (or doesn't have resale value). In the year 2005 you'll see all the top digital cameras of today will be worth next to nothing. Does it mean today cameras are crap or does it mean tomorrow digital cameras will be awesome and cheap?
Doesn't it depend on the industry or category they've trademarked the name? It works that way in my country. Of course, large companies just trademark stuff in all 53 categories from day 0, but most don't.
Since when did they started selling property? Last time I checked it looked mre like renting domains on a permanent first-refusal basis. If you miss one payment you don't own anything at all, and there is an infinite stream of payments that the registrar will want to (and will:) charge you.
Wouldn't it be valuable to start a "Prior Art Foundation" where EVERYONE could contribute ideas, process or whatever, and that the "prior art foundation" will only certify at what date the document arrived at the "Prior Art Database". Add some metadata and serach capabilities and we'd be able to cover mostly anything in 5 years, and overly broad patents days will be over? I mean, we should all submit ALL kind of idea, even if stupid , obvious or the "only way to do it" abeit trivially. It doesn't matter if we'd want to do any of those, but at least there would be specific documentation somebody said that first, so that they can't claim a patent. Even worst, they'd have to research this HUGE archive of "anti-patent minefield" because if not, they might end up putting resources in a field that is anti-mined, so they want to be able to go sue happy as they planned (ie: 0 unfair revenue, which is what they want).
Wouldn't a password work well for that? Some times I don't understand how people can be so naive as to think everything can be autosolved and unaudited and just work when in nature it's very complex. That's what will happen with DRM. It will be a real mess.
Bad for Microsoft == good for pretty much everyone else in the world.
How and why? Bad for Microsoft = Good for however go their money, and that certainly excludes most of us reading slashdot. Or they will charge less for the preloaded mandatory, warranty attached laptops or computers I use to buy?
The end result is my money goes to Microsoft even if I don't use their products, and in turn, that money goes to Sony or somebody else. Well, I can't see how much better I am after the "Bad for Microsoft".
On the other hand, "Linux = Good for Microsoft users" is the key here. They have less power to mandate everything because they can actually lose customers if they pull the rope too much. So all the Microsoftiers here and there should thank the competitors, NOT the sue happy lads.
Yes, we can think of more variables, as long as the space is 3D. Space, for us, is some kind of instantaneous visualisation. When you add time, you think about it as a path.
You can't really "perceive" the details of you last week experiences without linearly going though them, you can't... uh (for la of a better generic term) visualize them. But you can easily visualize a very complex shape in 3D with no need to add go linearly on the details.
So yes, I can think of color tone as a variable, radious of dots as a variable, time as a variable, anything as a variable but I can't imagine anything in 4D and sure as hell no in 4D.
Now, I don't know if that is _hardcoded_ problem for humans. Because as we know, we autoteach about 3D when we are born, and that gets burned in neuros structures.
What would happen if we attached a baby to a virtual but 100% consistent 4D world? That would be really hard, because we are 3D in nature...for ever do in us or elsewhere, there would be infinite other dots in 4D. Anyway, it's my guess he will adapt to it and will be able to come back to "3D" (with a lot of pain, but possible). What you cannot do is go from 3D to 4D once fully trained in 3D.
That would be a nice experiment, maybe with rats or some other mammal. Now, looking at 4D shapes as would be seen in our 3D mind is pretty impressive. Really crazy.
Tom, what is it that you are asking for? You'd do a lot better setting a goal and asking something specific, and saying what you will do if you reach a minimun set of funds to keep developing arch and then see how things go.
If for the time beign you are not lucky, you should give up and go on, you surely are talented and able to find a job soon if you want to play by your bosses rules (that always works).
Whining you are broken will only get you "condolences" and things like that.
Probably, and make the Java version weaker as they see fit. MS can build very decent software elsewhere, so when they buy is more for closing the branches they don't like and not because they really need the assets.
I bought my VW Golf two years ago, and i'm very pleased with it, except for that crappy in-dash radio they MADE me buy.
Did it come with an EULA that stated someone else could break into your car any second, watch what you have in the back, and possibly break your car if needs be? Or maybe delete that non-standard wheel that you added, because "oh, that may be used for racing!"?
So if you don't agree with that EULA you must take your stereo out of your car inmediately, but wait, that VOIDS the cars warranty and any customer support you could have gotten.
So in brief, bought a car and afterwards found out it came with a "bonus" that you CAN'T accept, but that will void your warranty if you don't accept. So eventually, the EULA of the car stereo may state that all you agree that all you bank accounts now belong to X BENEFICARY, and if you don't like it, you lose your warranty or whatever: they could even state that since you have already used the car, you can't return it now, because the warranty is void. And if you reinstall the stereo just to be able to get a refund, they could say they don't allow for refunds, only repairs.
Moreover, even in the case you don't give a damn about the warranty (or whatever is it that you are losing the rights to) and you agree not with the EULA of the stereo, and take it of the car, you still can't:
1) sell it 2) give it away for free
Maybe it could be posible that you can't even though it out of the street safely (that could be seen as promoting some else to use it). And even if you dispose it properly (say you bury it in the ground) and someone finds out, and they can check the serial number of the stereo and conclude you gave it away to somebody else and claim lost sales because of your actions.
Now replace stereo with Software and car with Computer and see if it's true or not. Ok, it's an extreme example, but goes to show your analogy is really failed.
Firstly, there is no reason why Microsoft couldn't sell their own version of Linux for the server
Their own version of what? They couldn't even touch GPLd code with a 10 feet pole. They can't buy all copyright holders.
They can only plant the seeds that will mutate Linux into one of their allies, and yes, this will be a very unhappy day for many folks..NET is part of it, they are trying to seduce companies into using whatever developement framework they want, as long as it's theirs.
Java is the only thing standing in the way, but as we all know, it's easier to develop for.NET and the will hedge te best by forcing everyone (as in sufficient critical mass x 3) to have to interface to.NET (F) code whether they like it not.
Nice. By the way, I don't remember how (it was not Phoenix related), minutes after posting I landed at themes.mozdev.org and found ALL pretty screenshot in all themes.
I don't know, couldn't they just put a visible link from the phoenix page to the themes area? And if the link is there, i can swear it's really not visible or intuitive. They just tell "Download", "Changelog", "Develop" and some other remarks like how it's not a stripped down mozilla.
They need a better webpage (but the program looks really good, I'll give it a try!!!)
90% of the cases require simple instalations. So you could provide [] Simple [] Hard radio buttons or whatever and solve the problem. But I know most developers do not like that, because the think of users as developers, which are only a small fraction.
If normal users can get to run a "common case" devian instalation and then just use the normal stuff in a normal system (OpenOffice, etc.) and learn more as they go (gradually), it will be a good thing to happen. As long as allowing for the common case scenario does not mean dumbing down the system (as in Metacity, which is a step backwards with respect to Sawfish, as an example).
Never been able to see a screenshot, ok i am curious and still happy with galeon. But i'd like to see if it will please my eyes or not in case i give it a shot.
Yes, you are semantically correct, as everyone else that follows the "computable" definition. I know it's computable in the usual sense and for all practical matters, though it will still take the function an infinite amount of time to just read in the (infinitly long) number i am thinking to supply the function. That was my point, to make clear separation of what computable means vs. being able to compute the ith pi digit up to _any_ precision (obviously cannot be done, as one could take an infinite time to supply the number and if there was such a thing as "infinite time", then the function would also need "infinite time" to compute th result.
Software fails because it lacks that special something that provokes everyone to switch.
You pretend to explain success with suceess itself? Oh yes, the software is successfull if everyone starts using it, but it does not help us see why software fails.
So what we need to understand is how to make people switch. And people switch mostly because everyone else is switching. Or the inverse. So nobody switchs. Individuals sense "heard movement". So to be sucessfull you people to sense the "heard movement" for a sustained time. In any other case, the "heard" does not move.
That's a problem that arises with 100% end user software for the masses. Chances are many geeks will be interested in the subject or some big corporation will use it as a good way of advertizement.
Other than that, I have proposed a way to construct a public fund to pay for the software. Think of it as Money@Home where everyone pays just a little so that they can have the best software open sourced. It could work in a ramsom model, inverse auction model (ie: here's 1 million dollars, offer me projects to open source).
And after that comes the problem maintaining the software and having a maintainable source code (users only see the end result, so they can shoot themselves in the feet if they are the ones choosing).
If packages could just focus on what makes them distinctive
That's exactly what most people try to avoid like the plague. They want an Office suit that behaves like MS Office, and does what it does. If you can create software that can mimic Office while using a radical new system that's available for the ones that want to retrain themselves, then GREAT: you are ahead of the competition. If you can't deliver that the people like about Office, the you lost (you don't need to mimic everything, just the parts what everone likes).
Open source is nice, but its economics are not as profitable as those of closed source software. That makes things tough.
But that's also why OSS is the only one that can stand up and say HERE I AM YOU MOTHERF*CKER in a 100% monopolized and uncompetitive market.
Let's face it, anything that is not open source doesn't have even the slightest chance of success in the MS monopolized world.
You either do it for reasons that go beyond your profit (directly) and you either use it because you are in a position where they can't ban you from (like in most companies). And from there we grow and carve the monopoly into a less confortable position.
Slashdot Mirror
Digital cameras include an infinite quantity of "film", so it will be cheaper in the long rise.
The fact that a 20 year old camera still has resale value is another separate issue. A 486 may have less resale value than a mechanical olivetti typewriter, but does it make the olivetti any more usefull? Nope, it only means we can produce faster chips and computer at a very low cost so it the 486 doesn't matter (or doesn't have resale value). In the year 2005 you'll see all the top digital cameras of today will be worth next to nothing. Does it mean today cameras are crap or does it mean tomorrow digital cameras will be awesome and cheap?
Doesn't it depend on the industry or category they've trademarked the name? It works that way in my country. Of course, large companies just trademark stuff in all 53 categories from day 0, but most don't.
Since when did they started selling property? Last time I checked it looked mre like renting domains on a permanent first-refusal basis. If you miss one payment you don't own anything at all, and there is an infinite stream of payments that the registrar will want to (and will :) charge you.
Doesn't matter, blind people also think in 3D and they, technically speaking, have zero eyes ;)
Wouldn't it be valuable to start a "Prior Art Foundation" where EVERYONE could contribute ideas, process or whatever, and that the "prior art foundation" will only certify at what date the document arrived at the "Prior Art Database". Add some metadata and serach capabilities and we'd be able to cover mostly anything in 5 years, and overly broad patents days will be over? I mean, we should all submit ALL kind of idea, even if stupid , obvious or the "only way to do it" abeit trivially. It doesn't matter if we'd want to do any of those, but at least there would be specific documentation somebody said that first, so that they can't claim a patent. Even worst, they'd have to research this HUGE archive of "anti-patent minefield" because if not, they might end up putting resources in a field that is anti-mined, so they want to be able to go sue happy as they planned (ie: 0 unfair revenue, which is what they want).
If you are root, you don't care. A better analogy would have been renaming root to drm :)
Wouldn't a password work well for that? Some times I don't understand how people can be so naive as to think everything can be autosolved and unaudited and just work when in nature it's very complex. That's what will happen with DRM. It will be a real mess.
Bad for Microsoft == good for pretty much everyone else in the world.
How and why? Bad for Microsoft = Good for however go their money, and that certainly excludes most of us reading slashdot. Or they will charge less for the preloaded mandatory, warranty attached laptops or computers I use to buy?
The end result is my money goes to Microsoft even if I don't use their products, and in turn, that money goes to Sony or somebody else. Well, I can't see how much better I am after the "Bad for Microsoft".
On the other hand, "Linux = Good for Microsoft users" is the key here. They have less power to mandate everything because they can actually lose customers if they pull the rope too much. So all the Microsoftiers here and there should thank the competitors, NOT the sue happy lads.
Independant varibles != Dimension.
... uh (for la of a better generic term) visualize them. But you can easily visualize a very complex shape in 3D with no need to add go linearly on the details.
...for ever do in us or elsewhere, there would be infinite other dots in 4D. Anyway, it's my guess he will adapt to it and will be able to come back to "3D" (with a lot of pain, but possible). What you cannot do is go from 3D to 4D once fully trained in 3D.
Yes, we can think of more variables, as long as the space is 3D. Space, for us, is some kind of instantaneous visualisation. When you add time, you think about it as a path.
You can't really "perceive" the details of you last week experiences without linearly going though them, you can't
So yes, I can think of color tone as a variable, radious of dots as a variable, time as a variable, anything as a variable but I can't imagine anything in 4D and sure as hell no in 4D.
Now, I don't know if that is _hardcoded_ problem for humans. Because as we know, we autoteach about 3D when we are born, and that gets burned in neuros structures.
What would happen if we attached a baby to a virtual but 100% consistent 4D world? That would be really hard, because we are 3D in nature
That would be a nice experiment, maybe with rats or some other mammal. Now, looking at 4D shapes as would be seen in our 3D mind is pretty impressive. Really crazy.
Tom, what is it that you are asking for? You'd do a lot better setting a goal and asking something specific, and saying what you will do if you reach a minimun set of funds to keep developing arch and then see how things go.
If for the time beign you are not lucky, you should give up and go on, you surely are talented and able to find a job soon if you want to play by your bosses rules (that always works).
Whining you are broken will only get you "condolences" and things like that.
What will they do with it... convert it to C#
Probably, and make the Java version weaker as they see fit. MS can build very decent software elsewhere, so when they buy is more for closing the branches they don't like and not because they really need the assets.
I bought my VW Golf two years ago, and i'm very pleased with it, except for that crappy in-dash radio they MADE me buy.
Did it come with an EULA that stated someone else could break into your car any second, watch what you have in the back, and possibly break your car if needs be? Or maybe delete that non-standard wheel that you added, because "oh, that may be used for racing!"?
So if you don't agree with that EULA you must take your stereo out of your car inmediately, but wait, that VOIDS the cars warranty and any customer support you could have gotten.
So in brief, bought a car and afterwards found out it came with a "bonus" that you CAN'T accept, but that will void your warranty if you don't accept. So eventually, the EULA of the car stereo may state that all you agree that all you bank accounts now belong to X BENEFICARY, and if you don't like it, you lose your warranty or whatever: they could even state that since you have already used the car, you can't return it now, because the warranty is void. And if you reinstall the stereo just to be able to get a refund, they could say they don't allow for refunds, only repairs.
Moreover, even in the case you don't give a damn about the warranty (or whatever is it that you are losing the rights to) and you agree not with the EULA of the stereo, and take it of the car, you still can't:
1) sell it
2) give it away for free
Maybe it could be posible that you can't even though it out of the street safely (that could be seen as promoting some else to use it). And even if you dispose it properly (say you bury it in the ground) and someone finds out, and they can check the serial number of the stereo and conclude you gave it away to somebody else and claim lost sales because of your actions.
Now replace stereo with Software and car with Computer and see if it's true or not. Ok, it's an extreme example, but goes to show your analogy is really failed.
Firstly, there is no reason why Microsoft couldn't sell their own version of Linux for the server
.NET is part of it, they are trying to seduce companies into using whatever developement framework they want, as long as it's theirs.
.NET and the will hedge te best by forcing everyone (as in sufficient critical mass x 3) to have to interface to .NET (F) code whether they like it not.
Their own version of what? They couldn't even touch GPLd code with a 10 feet pole. They can't buy all copyright holders.
They can only plant the seeds that will mutate Linux into one of their allies, and yes, this will be a very unhappy day for many folks.
Java is the only thing standing in the way, but as we all know, it's easier to develop for
Yeah, it was supposed to me an innocent bad joke :)
Mhh, very nice site! Looks great (both Phoenix + site)!
Nice. By the way, I don't remember how (it was not Phoenix related), minutes after posting I landed at themes.mozdev.org and found ALL pretty screenshot in all themes.
I don't know, couldn't they just put a visible link from the phoenix page to the themes area? And if the link is there, i can swear it's really not visible or intuitive. They just tell "Download", "Changelog", "Develop" and some other remarks like how it's not a stripped down mozilla.
They need a better webpage (but the program looks really good, I'll give it a try!!!)
Haven't looked at it, and it sounds like I won't as the message looks too goatsexy.
90% of the cases require simple instalations. So you could provide [] Simple [] Hard radio buttons or whatever and solve the problem. But I know most developers do not like that, because the think of users as developers, which are only a small fraction.
If normal users can get to run a "common case" devian instalation and then just use the normal stuff in a normal system (OpenOffice, etc.) and learn more as they go (gradually), it will be a good thing to happen. As long as allowing for the common case scenario does not mean dumbing down the system (as in Metacity, which is a step backwards with respect to Sawfish, as an example).
Aren't CF cards already IDE in nature (mini-IDE devices)?
Never been able to see a screenshot, ok i am curious and still happy with galeon. But i'd like to see if it will please my eyes or not in case i give it a shot.
Yes, you are semantically correct, as everyone else that follows the "computable" definition. I know it's computable in the usual sense and for all practical matters, though it will still take the function an infinite amount of time to just read in the (infinitly long) number i am thinking to supply the function. That was my point, to make clear separation of what computable means vs. being able to compute the ith pi digit up to _any_ precision (obviously cannot be done, as one could take an infinite time to supply the number and if there was such a thing as "infinite time", then the function would also need "infinite time" to compute th result.
Software fails because it lacks that special something that provokes everyone to switch.
You pretend to explain success with suceess itself? Oh yes, the software is successfull if everyone starts using it, but it does not help us see why software fails.
So what we need to understand is how to make people switch. And people switch mostly because everyone else is switching. Or the inverse. So nobody switchs. Individuals sense "heard movement". So to be sucessfull you people to sense the "heard movement" for a sustained time. In any other case, the "heard" does not move.
That's a problem that arises with 100% end user software for the masses. Chances are many geeks will be interested in the subject or some big corporation will use it as a good way of advertizement.
Other than that, I have proposed a way to construct a public fund to pay for the software. Think of it as Money@Home where everyone pays just a little so that they can have the best software open sourced. It could work in a ramsom model, inverse auction model (ie: here's 1 million dollars, offer me projects to open source).
And after that comes the problem maintaining the software and having a maintainable source code (users only see the end result, so they can shoot themselves in the feet if they are the ones choosing).
If packages could just focus on what makes them distinctive
That's exactly what most people try to avoid like the plague. They want an Office suit that behaves like MS Office, and does what it does. If you can create software that can mimic Office while using a radical new system that's available for the ones that want to retrain themselves, then GREAT: you are ahead of the competition. If you can't deliver that the people like about Office, the you lost (you don't need to mimic everything, just the parts what everone likes).
Open source is nice, but its economics are not as profitable as those of closed source software. That makes things tough.
But that's also why OSS is the only one that can stand up and say HERE I AM YOU MOTHERF*CKER in a 100% monopolized and uncompetitive market.
Let's face it, anything that is not open source doesn't have even the slightest chance of success in the MS monopolized world.
You either do it for reasons that go beyond your profit (directly) and you either use it because you are in a position where they can't ban you from (like in most companies). And from there we grow and carve the monopoly into a less confortable position.